Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

struggle4progress

(118,041 posts)
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 06:44 PM Jun 2014

Snowden: I Had More Access Than Almost Any Other Official

Edward Snowden: I Had More Access Than Almost Any Other Official in the Intelligence Community
The man responsible for leaking classified National Security Agency documents says he wasn't just "some low-level employee."

... Snowden was young. He was just a contractor. "How did a 29-year-old have access to all those classified documents?" asked Sonia Brindi of the Portuguese television network Globo during a lengthy new interview with Snowden in Moscow ... "How did you access them?"

The public's bewilderment is misplaced, Snowden replied. "There's sort of been a misinformation occurring in the U.S. media, that was then propagated by the international media, which was that I was some low-level employee, I didn't really have any understanding of these materials," he said. "I had functioning at a very senior level. I've written policies on behalf of the United States. I had been in meetings with the very top technical officials on the NSA and the CIA" ...

... "I would love to face court in the U.S.," he said — but only if reforms are made to the Espionage Act ...
74 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Snowden: I Had More Access Than Almost Any Other Official (Original Post) struggle4progress Jun 2014 OP
Of course he had more access than any other official, HE'S A DOUBLE NAUGHT SPY!!! MohRokTah Jun 2014 #1
don't see enough Hillbillies quotes arely staircase Jun 2014 #9
With all that top-level access, he STILL couldn't get proof of his claims. randome Jun 2014 #2
shit he apparantly doesn't know how to work expedia or travelocity. arely staircase Jun 2014 #11
Right.. High Level Super Spy couldn't quite pull Cha Jun 2014 #38
Dribble dribble dribble, next he will be saying he wrote our Constitution also. Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #3
He has some sort of martyr syndrome, I guess. randome Jun 2014 #7
Now that was some kind of news, like the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #12
What assignment with the NRA? sabrina 1 Jun 2014 #53
Sounds like he may have been a frequent guest of Holiday Inn Express...nt SidDithers Jun 2014 #4
+1 krawhitham Jun 2014 #26
Waiting for the delusional Snowdenistas to stop by & attempt to defend this one... baldguy Jun 2014 #5
they'll claim it's a bad translation. KittyWampus Jun 2014 #25
Calling DUers delusional is a response to the OP? As one of those 'delusional Snowdenistas' and sabrina 1 Jun 2014 #54
Snowdens claims about himself have always been full of lies baldguy Jun 2014 #69
Really? Chelsea Manning, do you remember the access that 'low level' analyst had to just sabrina 1 Jun 2014 #72
Depending on how the security was set up, if he was the systen administrator, he may djean111 Jun 2014 #6
What he revealed was true. merrily Jun 2014 #23
He had access to virtually everything. MannyGoldstein Jun 2014 #8
+ Infinity. Uncle Joe Jun 2014 #14
then why hasn't he shown us anything but a fisa court order nt arely staircase Jun 2014 #16
He doesn't have the documents anymore. MannyGoldstein Jun 2014 #18
good gawd almighty. so when to we get to see this important stuff? arely staircase Jun 2014 #22
Because Americans have a short attention span and the effort would be lost with one dump. Gravitycollapse Jun 2014 #30
There are more than 100 programs or NSA capabilities revealed in the press based on Snowden's docs. Luminous Animal Jun 2014 #32
thx for the link! Vattel Jun 2014 #35
You are welcome! Luminous Animal Jun 2014 #36
Excellent resource. Thank you. woo me with science Jun 2014 #41
Agreed... MrMickeysMom Jun 2014 #44
Staggering incompetence. joshcryer Jun 2014 #51
Er... so he's saying he'll face court in the US provided they make everything he did legal? LadyHawkAZ Jun 2014 #10
We will give him access to the courts, see if he is going to show up. Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #13
The Espionage Act is unusual and rarely used, in part because MannyGoldstein Jun 2014 #15
You can't think clearly if you don't get your facts right, and "The Obama Administration struggle4progress Jun 2014 #42
You're right. I forgot the words "for whistle blowing or leaking information." MannyGoldstein Jun 2014 #43
To regard Snowden's activities as "whistle-blowing," you have to define "whistle-blowing" struggle4progress Jun 2014 #63
Government workers. The Obama Admin has prosecuted more government workers than all other Presidents Luminous Animal Jun 2014 #65
Making stuff up doesn't help us move in a positive direction either struggle4progress Jun 2014 #67
Apparently he doesn't understand that changes in the law aren't typically retroactive: struggle4progress Jun 2014 #17
No. He's not referring the parts of the law governing his "crime". dawg Jun 2014 #19
Nope. Snowden's been purposefully charged under the Espionage Act riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #21
retro-active immunity Fred Drum Jun 2014 #70
A priori some seem to know that this is false" Vattel Jun 2014 #20
I used to be a system adminstrator. Yes, I could see all of the information. djean111 Jun 2014 #24
access to govt systems HipChick Jun 2014 #39
LIHOP is my running theory. joshcryer Jun 2014 #47
everything is logged, lmao Fred Drum Jun 2014 #71
Well, a coworker, in the press, said that Snowden had all the keys because he was given the keys. Luminous Animal Jun 2014 #33
Well there it is! Several posts showing why he had this access. Thanks! nt Mojorabbit Jun 2014 #37
It is certainly true. joshcryer Jun 2014 #46
...except for emails proving he went through proper channels questioning NSA practices uponit7771 Jun 2014 #27
And, If he to you what he knew, he would have to kill you liberal N proud Jun 2014 #28
And when that didn't work BeyondGeography Jun 2014 #29
Duped? Aerows Jun 2014 #49
Except he didn't have your apparently innate powers of deduction BeyondGeography Jun 2014 #58
I have extremely poor eyesight Aerows Jun 2014 #74
BushInc. blm Jun 2014 #31
I would think you would be reluctant to use National Journal as a source.. grasswire Jun 2014 #34
Nowadays I can already get a whopping dose of anti-Obama propaganda here at DU struggle4progress Jun 2014 #40
I'm waiting for the list of names Aerows Jun 2014 #45
? He's beginning to sound somewhat inflated in his self-importance ... Hekate Jun 2014 #48
I'm waiting for the list of names Aerows Jun 2014 #50
What's the maximum sentence for violating the Fourth Amendment? jberryhill Jun 2014 #55
It's not a violation of the fourth amendment. stevenleser Jun 2014 #59
I wasn't asking if there was a violation jberryhill Jun 2014 #61
That's what makes me suspicious... Blue_Tires Jun 2014 #52
He was asked the question... how did you get access... Luminous Animal Jun 2014 #64
Did you expect Snowden to tell the truth? randome Jun 2014 #68
Actually I expected the question to not get asked at all Blue_Tires Jun 2014 #73
Thank you Edward Snowden. SamKnause Jun 2014 #56
yes, thank you Edward Snowden. nt grasswire Jun 2014 #66
Less than 3 months at BAH. moondust Jun 2014 #57
It's a good thing the justice department has stocked up on kryptonite... stevenleser Jun 2014 #60
So, nobody at NSA had access to all this stuff? jberryhill Jun 2014 #62
 

randome

(34,845 posts)
2. With all that top-level access, he STILL couldn't get proof of his claims.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 06:47 PM
Jun 2014

In-fucking-credible! Hey, Ed, if you ever visit DU to see what people think of you, it's time you stopped the bullshit and came home.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
11. shit he apparantly doesn't know how to work expedia or travelocity.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:13 PM
Jun 2014

If we are to believe the he totally didn't plan on going to russia line.

Cha

(295,926 posts)
38. Right.. High Level Super Spy couldn't quite pull
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 09:40 PM
Jun 2014

that off. But, high level super spy lies.. a lot.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
3. Dribble dribble dribble, next he will be saying he wrote our Constitution also.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 06:56 PM
Jun 2014

He has diarrhea of the mouth, doesn't know when to shut up. He continues to convince me he wanted to be guilty of espionage before he ever took the first assignment with the NRA.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
7. He has some sort of martyr syndrome, I guess.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:09 PM
Jun 2014

Why else would he abandon his girlfriend and his family in order to 'reveal' to us that the NSA spies on other countries?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
54. Calling DUers delusional is a response to the OP? As one of those 'delusional Snowdenistas' and
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 12:09 AM
Jun 2014

very proud of my consistent support for Whistle Blowers just to be clear, do you have something other than the boring attempt to insult most of DU, to contradict Snowden's statements? I didn't notice anything of substance countering what he said, a link to some credible source would be helpful.

 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
69. Snowdens claims about himself have always been full of lies
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 06:49 AM
Jun 2014

and now are becoming increasingly absurd. Low level contractors do not get a greater level of system access than their employers. That's simply not how things work.

Lies like this are par for the course for your typical RW libertarian, so the unquestioning idolization of the RW libertarian Ed Snowden could only be one of three things: profound ignorance, delusion, or collaboration. Would you rather confess to one of the other two?

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
72. Really? Chelsea Manning, do you remember the access that 'low level' analyst had to just
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 01:03 PM
Jun 2014

about everything? I believe there was quite a discussion about how many 'analysts', in the millions I believe, have access to supposedly 'sensitive' material.

Or were not paying attention to that Whistle Case as it unfolded?

You have provided nothing to disprove Snowden's statements, just your uninformed opinion. I gave you a chance to do so, it's clear you are unable to. Btw, people's opinions on the internet are not proof of anything, but there's always a chance they actually can back up those opinions which is why I usually ask for something to do that.

No point in continuing a discussion the is just about opinion. Thanks for the responses anyhow.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
6. Depending on how the security was set up, if he was the systen administrator, he may
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:06 PM
Jun 2014

very well have had access to everything. I did, as sysadmin on HP and Tandem systems.
Bottom line, and only important thing - is what he revealed true or false? Seems true, there is such an uproar......

merrily

(45,251 posts)
23. What he revealed was true.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 08:31 PM
Jun 2014

Not only is there an uproar, but there has been no denial, not even as to what his position was. After being played Snowden's tape, Kerry said only that he (Kerry) was "not about to get into" what Snowden was or wasn't.

Kerry didn't deny the bit about Snowden's being in Russia because of the US revoking his passport while he was airborne, either.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
8. He had access to virtually everything.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:10 PM
Jun 2014
http://www.npr.org/2014/04/16/303733011/edward-snowden-from-geeky-drop-out-to-nsa-leaker

On why Snowden had so much access to NSA files during his project in Hawaii

The NSA now tells us they're able to explain why Snowden was able to roam so free through the computers — including many niches he should not have otherwise been able to access. And it turns out, the NSA tells us, it was because they had given Snowden a different assignment, a unique assignment if you will, just because he was in Hawaii.

Hawaii is at the end of a long, long tagline with Washington and it's not necessarily always up to date on the latest procedures and things that should be gotten from Washington. Further, if there's ever any type of disconnect between Fort Meade and Hawaii — technically or communications-wise — Fort Meade, the headquarters of the NSA, was very concerned that somehow they would not be able to reach Hawaii: literally [would be unable to] communicate with them in the event of, I don't know, a nuclear problem or an earthquake or something.

What Snowden was doing was downloading and copying and backing up hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of pages of documents to make sure Hawaii had it all in case something went wrong. ... What no one realized at the time, of course, is that he was also making copies for his own reasons.


If he had that much access and was simply a low-level person - then the NSA's incompetence would be all the more staggering.

Uncle Joe

(58,112 posts)
14. + Infinity.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:16 PM
Jun 2014


If he had that much access and was simply a low-level person - then the NSA's incompetence would be all the more staggering.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
18. He doesn't have the documents anymore.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:34 PM
Jun 2014

Last edited Wed Jun 4, 2014, 12:22 AM - Edit history (1)

The press has them. And his agreement with the press IIRC is that nothing is to be made public that could conceivably actually hurt the US. We also know he had access to an incredible stash of documents, but we don't know if he had access to emails - that's usually a separate thing (files vs. email server).

So he might be BSing us - but there are reasonable explanations for what he has and hasn't disclosed.

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
22. good gawd almighty. so when to we get to see this important stuff?
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:53 PM
Jun 2014

This clear and present danger to the republic has to wait to be exposed for what? Greenwald's book tour?

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
30. Because Americans have a short attention span and the effort would be lost with one dump.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 08:56 PM
Jun 2014

I've already explained this to someone else but apparently the inability to conjure possible scenarios outside of a preconceived narrative is epidemic here.

If all of the information was dumped at one time, the story would last for a few days or weeks and then our collective attention would latch onto something else. The story and the work would be lost. The government and its yeomen know this. Which is why the "milking the story" accusation is tossed around by so many people, including you.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
32. There are more than 100 programs or NSA capabilities revealed in the press based on Snowden's docs.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 08:58 PM
Jun 2014
http://nsa.gov1.info/dni/

This site organizes them by month and links to the related articles.
 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
15. The Espionage Act is unusual and rarely used, in part because
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:29 PM
Jun 2014

it prevents a defendant from properly defending themselves in court - you know, don't want to reveal state secrets that will help the enemy and that stuff. Much is kept secret. It's extremely unfair, which is why it was very rarely used. Until now.

The Obama Administration has prosecuted more people under the Espionage Act, for whistle blowing or leaking information, than all other Presidents combined. Somehow, things are more dangerous today than under world wars and the Cold War.

struggle4progress

(118,041 posts)
42. You can't think clearly if you don't get your facts right, and "The Obama Administration
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 10:57 PM
Jun 2014

has prosecuted more people under the Espionage Act than all other Presidents combined" is just complete bullshit

By June 1918, there had been at least 1181 prosecutions under the Espionage Act (pdf). The Act has since been amended on several occasions, with repeal of some of the worst amendments in 1921 in the wake of the Palmer raids

There have been over 150 espionage prosecutions in the US against US citizens alone since the 1940s

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
43. You're right. I forgot the words "for whistle blowing or leaking information."
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 11:46 PM
Jun 2014

I regret the error.

I'll correct it.

Thanks for the heads up.

struggle4progress

(118,041 posts)
63. To regard Snowden's activities as "whistle-blowing," you have to define "whistle-blowing"
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 01:08 AM
Jun 2014

so it includes hobbies such as informing foreign governments about secret US programs, as Snowden did when he provided the Chinese with a list of NSA targets in China -- but such activities have regularly been prosecuted in the US as espionage for many decades

NSA hacks China, leaker Snowden claims
By Jethro Mullen and Chelsea J. Carter, CNN
updated 5:32 AM EDT, Thu June 13, 2013
... NSA leaker Edward Snowden told the South China Morning Post on Wednesday ... <that> ... Among some 61,000 reported targets of the National Security Agency .. are hundreds of computers in China ... The Morning Post said it had seen documents provided by Snowden ...

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
65. Government workers. The Obama Admin has prosecuted more government workers than all other Presidents
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 01:16 AM
Jun 2014

combined.

struggle4progress

(118,041 posts)
17. Apparently he doesn't understand that changes in the law aren't typically retroactive:
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:30 PM
Jun 2014

the standard rule is that you are tried under the law as it was at the time of the offense, not as it was later amended

dawg

(10,610 posts)
19. No. He's not referring the parts of the law governing his "crime".
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:43 PM
Jun 2014

He's referring to the parts of the law that would allow the government to effectively gag him at his trial, disallowing any evidence he might want to present as being a vital national security secret.

Only a fool would submit to a trial under such circumstances.

 

riderinthestorm

(23,272 posts)
21. Nope. Snowden's been purposefully charged under the Espionage Act
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:47 PM
Jun 2014

which means the defendant is under a huge disadvantage in defending themselves.

Here's a good explanation.

http://pando.com/2014/01/22/how-whistleblowers-are-barred-from-defending-themselves-in-court/

Fred Drum

(293 posts)
70. retro-active immunity
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 06:52 AM
Jun 2014

sort of like the telecoms got

i wonder if snowden made any campaign contributions?

 

Vattel

(9,289 posts)
20. A priori some seem to know that this is false"
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 07:46 PM
Jun 2014

Snowden had more responsibility at the NSA than people may think, he said. "I was what's called a systems administrator or a superuser, which means that I had more access than almost any other official in the intelligence community," he said. "Because even the director of the National Security Agency or the Central Intelligence Agency or any of these things, when they want to see some documents, when they want to understand some program, they have to ask someone: 'Show me this, tell me about this, brief this for me.' "

And that someone was Snowden. "As a systems administrator, you are the person who can see all of that, because you are the one who controls all of the information."

Is this true or false? Idk. How about you?

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
24. I used to be a system adminstrator. Yes, I could see all of the information.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 08:38 PM
Jun 2014

Just remembering, on the Hewlett Packard 3000, we had a program from Vesoft (Vladimir and Eugene Volokh, treated like rock stars at conventions) that was actually called God. Whoever had the password to that could do and see anything and everything.
Sysadmin is a lot of responsibility, and needs to have access to everything, as a general rule, in case things go bad. or people fuck up, or don't understand something.

HipChick

(25,485 posts)
39. access to govt systems
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 09:47 PM
Jun 2014

are a bit different...everything is logged on classified systems...he was a low level dongle thief

Fred Drum

(293 posts)
71. everything is logged, lmao
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 06:59 AM
Jun 2014

that must explain why the NSA immediately knew what he'd taken

no wait, thats the opposite of reality

bizarre

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
33. Well, a coworker, in the press, said that Snowden had all the keys because he was given the keys.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 09:02 PM
Jun 2014
But an NSA staffer who contacted me last month and asked not to be identified–and whose claims we checked with Snowden himself via his ACLU lawyer Ben Wizner—offered me a very different, firsthand portrait of how Snowden was seen by his colleagues in the agency’s Hawaii office: A principled and ultra-competent, if somewhat eccentric employee, and one who earned the access used to pull off his leak by impressing superiors with sheer talent.


The anonymous NSA staffer’s priority in contacting me, in fact, was to refute stories that have surfaced as the NSA and the media attempt to explain how a contractor was able to obtain and leak the tens of thousands of highly classified documents that have become the biggest public disclosure of NSA secrets in history. According to the source, Snowden didn’t dupe coworkers into handing over their passwords, as one report has claimed. Nor did Snowden fabricate SSH keys to gain unauthorized access, he or she says.

Instead, there’s little mystery as to how Snowden gained his access: It was given to him.

“That kid was a genius among geniuses,” says the NSA staffer. “NSA is full of smart people, but anybody who sat in a meeting with Ed will tell you he was in a class of his own…I’ve never seen anything like it.”


http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/12/16/an-nsa-coworker-remembers-the-real-edward-snowden-a-genius-among-geniuses/

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
46. It is certainly true.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 11:54 PM
Jun 2014

The question is whether the NSA had a watchdog on privilege escalation on the systems.

liberal N proud

(60,302 posts)
28. And, If he to you what he knew, he would have to kill you
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 08:48 PM
Jun 2014

That was until he told the Chinese and the Russians.

I had a brother who was military intel. Every time we were together he would give me that bullshit line.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
49. Duped?
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 11:58 PM
Jun 2014

I can tell you half of my coworkers passwords because they are so simple a child could crack them. A string of lowercase characters with nothing capitalized and no numerical characters is just begging to be used.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
74. I have extremely poor eyesight
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 01:54 PM
Jun 2014

I spent several months of being in 2nd grade without glasses actually having to watch the teacher make motions on the chalkboard to deduce what was written. To this day, I still can see what people are writing or typing due to the motion of their hands.

Believe me, I would exchange that for having better eyesight.

blm

(112,920 posts)
31. BushInc.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 08:56 PM
Jun 2014

I never thought he was a low-level employee, either.

No one who works for private intel and security firms loyal to BushInc are 'low-level' employees in a Dem administration.

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
34. I would think you would be reluctant to use National Journal as a source..
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 09:09 PM
Jun 2014

.....considering the awful stories there about Obama now, mostly by Ron Fournier..

struggle4progress

(118,041 posts)
40. Nowadays I can already get a whopping dose of anti-Obama propaganda here at DU
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 09:58 PM
Jun 2014

So I begin not to pay it much mind

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
50. I'm waiting for the list of names
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 12:01 AM
Jun 2014

That will be the bomb that shows that the NSA DOES spy on American citizens on American soil. Major violation of the 4th Amendment.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
59. It's not a violation of the fourth amendment.
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 12:45 AM
Jun 2014

Court finds FISA constitutional - United States v. Duggan, 743 F.2d 59 (2nd Cir. 1984)

[1] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

[2] Nos. 83-1313, 83-1315, 83-1317, 83-1318

[3] 1984.C02.40409 <http://www.versuslaw.com>; 743 F.2d 59

[4] decided: August 8, 1984.

[5] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE,
v.
ANDREW DUGGAN, EAMON MEEHAN, GABRIEL MEGAHEY, AND COLM MEEHAN, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS

.
.
.

Prior to the enactment of FISA, virtually every court that had addressed the issue had concluded that the President had the inherent power to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance to collect foreign intelligence information, and that such surveillances constituted an exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment. See United States v. Truong Dinh Hung, 629 F.2d 908, 912-14 (4th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1144, 71 L. Ed. 2d 296, 102 S. Ct. 1004 (1982); United States v. Buck, 548 F.2d 871, 875 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 890, 54 L. Ed. 2d 175, 98 S. Ct. 263 (1977); United States v. Butenko, 494 F.2d 593, 605 (3d Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 881, 42 L. Ed. 2d 121, 95 S. Ct. 147 (1974); United States v. Brown, 484 F.2d 418, 426 (5th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 960, 39 L. Ed. 2d 575, 94 S. Ct. 1490 (1974); but see Zweibon v. Mitchell, 170 U.S. App. D.C. 1, 516 F.2d 594, 633-651 (D.C. Cir. 1975), (dictum), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 944, 48 L. Ed. 2d 187, 96 S. Ct. 1685 (1976). The Supreme Court specifically declined to address this issue in United States v. United States District Court [Keith, J.], 407 U.S. 297, 308, 321-22, 32 L. Ed. 2d 752, 92 S. Ct. 2125 (1972) (hereinafter referred to as " Keith &quot , but it had made clear that the requirements of the Fourth Amendment may change when differing governmental interests are at stake, see Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523, 87 S. Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed. 2d 930 (1967), and it observed in Keith that the governmental interests presented in national security investigations differ substantially from those presented in traditional criminal investigations. 407 U.S. at 321-324.

[85] In Keith, the government argued that Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act, 18 U.S.C. ?? 2510 et seq. ("Title III&quot , recognized the constitutional authority of the President to conduct domestic security surveillances without a warrant. The Court rejected this argument, noting that the legislative history made clear that Title III was not intended to legislate with respect to national security surveillances. The Court went on to hold that a warrant was required in Keith under the Fourth Amendment; but the implication of its discussion was that the warrant requirement is flexible and that different standards may be compatible with the Fourth Amendment in light of the different purposes and practical considerations of domestic national security surveillances. 407 U.S. at 321-24. Thus, the Court observed

[86] that domestic security surveillance may involve different policy and practical considerations from the surveillance of "ordinary crime." The gathering of security intelligence is often long range and involves the interrelation of various sources and types of information. The exact targets of such surveillance may be more difficult to identify than in surveillance operations against many types of crime specified in Title III. Often, too, the emphasis of domestic intelligence gathering is on the prevention of unlawful activity or the enhancement of the Government's preparedness for some possible future crisis or emergency. Thus, the focus of domestic surveillance may be less precise than that directed against more conventional types of crime.

[87] Id. at 322-23.

[88] Against this background, Congress passed FISA to settle what it believed to be the unresolved question of the applicability of the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement to electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes, and to "remove any doubt as to the lawfulness of such surveillance." H.R. Rep. 1283, pt. I, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 25 (1978) ("House Report&quot . FISA reflects both Congress's "legislative judgment" that the court orders and other procedural safeguards laid out in the Act "are necessary to insure that electronic surveillance by the U.S. Government within this country conforms to the fundamental principles of the fourth amendment," S. Rep. No. 701, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 13, reprinted in 1978 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 3973, 3982 ("Senate Report 95-701&quot , and its attempt to fashion a "secure framework by which the Executive Branch may conduct legitimate electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes within the context of this Nation's commitment to privacy and individual rights." S. Rep. No. 604, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 15, reprinted in 1978 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 3904, 3916 ("Senate Report 95-604&quot . In constructing this framework, Congress gave close scrutiny to departures from those Fourth Amendment doctrines applicable in the criminal-investigation context in order

[89] to ensure that the procedures established in [FISA] are reasonable in relation to legitimate foreign counterintelligence requirements and the protected rights of individuals. Their reasonableness depends, in part, upon an assessment of the difficulties of investigating activities planned, directed, and supported from abroad by foreign intelligence services and foreign-based terrorist groups. The differences between ordinary criminal investigations to gather evidence of specific crimes and foreign counterintelligence investigations to uncover and monitor clandestine activities have been taken into account. Other factors include the international responsibilities of the United States, the duties of the Federal Government to the States in matters involving foreign terrorism, and the need to maintain the secrecy of lawful counterintelligence sources and methods.

[90] Senate Report 95-701, at 14-15, reprinted in 1978 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 3973, 3983.

[91] We regard the procedures fashioned in FISA as a constitutionally adequate balancing of the individual's Fourth Amendment rights against the nation's need to obtain foreign intelligence information. The governmental concerns are detailed in the passages quoted above from Keith and the legislative history of FISA, and those concerns make reasonable the adoption of prerequisites to surveillance that are less stringent than those precedent to the issuance of a warrant for a criminal investigation. See generally United States v. Belfield, 223 U.S. App. D.C. 417, 692 F.2d 141, 148 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (examining in camera review procedures of FISA (see Part II. B. 2., infra)). Against this background, the Act requires that the FISA Judge find probable cause to believe that the target is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power, and that the place at which the electronic surveillance is to be directed is being used or is about to be used by a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power; and it requires him to find that the application meets the requirements of the Act. These requirements make it reasonable to dispense with a requirement that the FISA Judge find probable cause to believe that surveillance will in fact lead to the gathering of foreign intelligence information.*fn5 Further, if the target is a United States person, the Act requires the FISA Judge to determine that the executive branch's certifications pursuant to ? 1804(a)(7) are not clearly erroneous in light of the application as a whole, and to find that the application properly proposes, as required by ? 1801(h), to minimize the intrusion upon the target's privacy.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
61. I wasn't asking if there was a violation
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 12:52 AM
Jun 2014

I'm asking to know what the penalty is for violating the Fourth Amendment.

Let's assume that is established.

I would like someone to at least point out the jail sentence, fine, or whatever it is, that proceeds from finding a violation.

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
52. That's what makes me suspicious...
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 12:05 AM
Jun 2014

When someone has to repeatedly TELL you how smart/rich/influential/powerful/sexy/generally great they are, 99 times out of 100 it's a smokescreen...

At least we know beyond a doubt that he isn't ever coming back unless he gets that miracle presidential pardon he's banking on; because they aren't reforming the Espionage Act just for his retroactive benefit...I might as well say "Yeah, I'll come back to the U.S. to face that murder charge, but only if reforms are made to murder laws..." (and yes, before anybody asks, I can put up a very strong argument that the person I murdered was in the public interest)

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
64. He was asked the question... how did you get access...
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 01:13 AM
Jun 2014

Did you expect him to answer, "Aw shucks, jus lucky ah guess."

FYI, there are countries that refuse to extradite based on the fact that we execute. So, yeah, seeking asylum based on our "murder laws" (state sanctioned murder) is an affirmative plea for escaping extradition.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
68. Did you expect Snowden to tell the truth?
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 06:20 AM
Jun 2014

His stories get more outrageous as this 'affair' nears its one year anniversary. One year and still nothing illegal revealed.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
73. Actually I expected the question to not get asked at all
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 01:41 PM
Jun 2014

since it has been answered repeatedly in every major story over the past year...

But once asked, I expected Snowden to give a direct answer without the self-congratulatory heroic embellishment that he constantly exudes...

moondust

(19,917 posts)
57. Less than 3 months at BAH.
Wed Jun 4, 2014, 12:25 AM
Jun 2014

Not enough time to do much more than copy documents, maybe scan a few things now and then but without the benefit of historical context to understand their meaning or importance.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Snowden: I Had More Acces...